News War with Russia

[Wij]

The only concrete claim was 'They used a school'.

Which considering no one is going to school at the moment is not a violation of anything.

«Це не про пошук і не про донесення до світу правди». Що не так з доповіддю Amnesty International про війну в Україні та дії ЗСУ | StopFake

www.stopfake.org

 

[MYstIC G]

Point

 

[MYstIC G]

Counterpoint

 

[MYstIC G]

Original Point

 

[MYstIC G]

Same Counterpoint

 

[MYstIC G]

</Thread>

 

[Raven]

</Thread>

Hitler

Bilbo

 

[MYstIC G]

Hitler

Bilbo

Meh, it's been a quiet weekend so I'll take it

 

[caLLous]

 

[Scouse]

@Wij:

Amnesty regrets ‘distress’ caused by claims in Ukraine report

Rights group defends allegations that military endangered civilians but says none of them justify Russia’s actions

www.theguardian.com

"Amnesty International deeply regrets the distress and anger that our press release on the Ukrainian military’s fighting tactics has caused"

Amnesty said it had interviewed hundreds of Ukrainian victims “whose stories illuminate the brutal reality of Russia’s war of aggression”

“We have challenged the world to demonstrate its solidarity with Ukrainians through concrete action, and we will continue to do so

However:

We fully stand by our findings [but] nothing we documented Ukrainian forces doing in any way justifies Russian violations

 

[Scouse]

Now. Are we allowed to talk about the Ukranians shelling the Europes biggest Nuclear power plant? I mean, we were all over the Russians when they did it - but does Ukraine get a pass for putting all of Europe at risk?

The UN nuclear watchdog has called for an immediate end to all military action near the plant after it was hit by shelling on Saturday night, causing one of the reactors to shut down and creating a “very real risk of a nuclear disaster”.

 

[Wij]

@Wij:

Amnesty regrets ‘distress’ caused by claims in Ukraine report

Rights group defends allegations that military endangered civilians but says none of them justify Russia’s actions

www.theguardian.com

However:

Non-apology and still way out of its lane questioning Ukraine's military decisions where it has no expertise and still no actual fucking evidence in the report.

 

[Wij]

Now. Are we allowed to talk about the Ukranians shelling the Europes biggest Nuclear power plant? I mean, we were all over the Russians when they did it - but does Ukraine get a pass for putting all of Europe at risk?

You are missing a link.

 

[Scouse]

After months having people on the ground gathering evidence?

[Amnesty] “found instances where Ukrainian forces had located themselves right next to where civilians were living, thereby potentially putting them at risk from incoming Russian fire”.

“We made this assessment based on the rules of international humanitarian law, which require all parties to a conflict to avoid locating, to the maximum extent feasible, military objectives within or near densely populated areas

 

[Scouse]

You are missing a link.

I'd edited the post (and included a link). However, it's been all over the news since Saturday and you're all over Ukraine, so I can't help but feeling that you're resorting to an absurd level of denialist asshattery here Wij - I don't believe for a second you've not already read about it.

Did you just stick it in the bin that said "bad stuff done by Ukraine - to be disregarded"?

 

[Wij]

After months having people on the ground gathering evidence?

[Amnesty] “found instances where Ukrainian forces had located themselves right next to where civilians were living, thereby potentially putting them at risk from incoming Russian fire”.

“We made this assessment based on the rules of international humanitarian law, which require all parties to a conflict to avoid locating, to the maximum extent feasible, military objectives within or near densely populated areas

[/QUOTE]
And do they give a time and place?

It's not a violation of anything to be near civilians sometimes. Does it say they were launching missiles from there or just sleeping in a place with a good bomb shelter?

 

[Wij]

I'd edited the post (and included a link). However, it's been all over the news since Saturday and you're all over Ukraine, so I can't help but feeling that you're resorting to an absurd level of denialist asshattery here Wij - I don't believe for a second you've not already read about it.

Did you just stick it in the bin that said "bad stuff done by Ukraine - to be disregarded"?

The one Russia has occupied and turned into a military base then?

 

[Scouse]

The one Russia has occupied and turned into a military base then?

Apologist.

 

[Wij]

Apologist.

Mmmkay.

 

[Scouse]

Mmmkay.

Yeah. Not having it Wij - justify anyone shelling a nuclear power plant.

We (rightly) condemned Russia for the dangerous takeover of the plant. At that point it should have been 100% ringfenced from military operations. But Ukraine has bombed it again. Endangering all of Europe. And not a hint of condemnation from you - in fact the opposite. Your post gives the impression that you condone the action because anything anti-Russia is fair game.

Shelling nuclear plants is never fair game. It's a disgraceful act by the Ukranians that puts us all at risk. I'd hope that Western governments have been on the blower threatening to withdraw support unless this sort of action never happens again.

 

[Wij]

Yeah. Not having it Wij - justify anyone shelling a nuclear power plant.

We (rightly) condemned Russia for the dangerous takeover of the plant. At that point it should have been 100% ringfenced from military operations. But Ukraine has bombed it again. Endangering all of Europe. And not a hint of condemnation from you - in fact the opposite. Your post gives the impression that you condone the action because anything anti-Russia is fair game.

Shelling nuclear plants is never fair game. It's a disgraceful act by the Ukranians that puts us all at risk. I'd hope that Western governments have been on the blower threatening to withdraw support unless this sort of action never happens again.

Where did they hit it? Anything actually concrete? Any response from Ukraine?

 

[Gwadien]

Where did they hit it? Anything actually concrete? Any response from Ukraine?

So you'd only believe it if Ukraine admitted to it?

 

[Wij]

This was updated 2 mins ago and no one has any evidence yet it even was Ukraine or Russia so it seems a bit premature to ask me to condemn it:

Ukraine, Russia trade blame for nuclear plant shelling amid global alarm

Kyiv and Moscow traded blame on Monday for the weekend shelling of Ukraine's Zaporizhzhia nuclear complex amid international alarm that their battle for control of the plant could trigger catastrophe.

www.reuters.com

Also Ukraine seems pretty clear that the area should be demilitarised and peacekeepers deployed.

 

[Wij]

So you'd only believe it if Ukraine admitted to it?

Russia says it was Ukraine is not evidence is it.

 

[Scouse]

Where did they hit it? Anything actually concrete? Any response from Ukraine?

Did you not even bother reading the link I provided?

With commentary by the Head of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency?

I mean, is the United Nations not high enough on the list of "concrete" sources?

How about a Ukranian source? (same article):

Ukrainian nuclear power company Energoatom said the attack had damaged a power cable and forced one of the reactors to stop working, and that “there are still risks of leaking hydrogen and radioactive substances, and the risk of fire is also high”. The shelling “has caused a serious risk for the safe operation of the plant”, Grossi said.

“Military action jeopardising the safety and security of the nuclear power plant is completely unacceptable and must be avoided at all costs. Any military firepower directed at or from the facility would amount to playing with fire, with potentially catastrophic consequences.

???

Kyiv accuses Russian troops of storing heavy weapons at the plant

Basically an admission from Ukrainian government. And effectively your apologist justification from above.

It's not under any doubt at all. Ukrainian troops shelled the fucking plant. Period.

It's disturbing how you're normally relatively rational but you're now wilfully blind. So, please:

justify anyone shelling a nuclear power plant.

You're either OK with people shelling nuclear plants, or you're not OK with it. Which is it?

 

[Wij]

Did you not even bother reading the link I provided?

With commentary by the Head of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency?

I mean, is the United Nations not high enough on the list of "concrete" sources?

How about a Ukranian source? (same article):


???

Basically an admission from Ukrainian government. And effectively your apologist justification from above.

It's not under any doubt at all. Ukrainian troops shelled the fucking plant. Period.

It's disturbing how you're normally relatively rational but you're now wilfully blind. So, please:


You're either OK with people shelling nuclear plants, or you're not OK with it. Which is it?

I've just read about 20 articles on it now and still no one has any proof of who fired what from where. The people running the plant specifically said that Russians fired rockets towards spent fuel containers but you can take that with a pinch of salt if you wish.

What is beyond doubt is that using a nuclear plant as a military shield is completely unacceptable.

 

[Scouse]

What is beyond doubt is that using a nuclear plant as a military shield is completely unacceptable.

Absolutely. Second only to actually firing at it. And I'm sure that Russia has been firing on their own troops in a facility they control.

Since we're not making any progress - how about the complaints from the IAEA that Ukraine are blocking UN-access to the facility because they see it as "legitimising Russian control"?

Having UN people on the ground there would make us all safer and conveniently would be able to provide irrefutable evidence of the goings-on. So, why aren't we piling all-in on Ukraine to force their hands here? "Let the fucking UN in you dumb cunts, or we cut off your supply lines"??

Seems a reasonable and proportionate action to ensure our "ally" is acting in good faith, no?

 

[Wij]

Absolutely. Second only to actually firing at it. And I'm sure that Russia has been firing on their own troops in a facility they control.

Ukraine never said the Russians fired at their own troops. They accused them of firing at a part of the site they had moved on from to blow cables and create power cuts to southern Ukraine.

 

[Wij]

Oh, and mining the area, and preventing access by fire crews.

 

[Scouse]

Ukraine never said the Russians fired at their own troops. They accused them of firing at a part of the site they had moved on from to blow cables and create power cuts to southern Ukraine.

They own the site and rather than either a) cutting the wires or b) simply turning the power off, we're supposed to consider that they would rather use missiles?

Rrriiiiight.

Anyway.

how about the complaints from the IAEA that Ukraine are blocking UN-access to the facility because they see it as "legitimising Russian control"?

Having UN people on the ground there would make us all safer and conveniently would be able to provide irrefutable evidence of the goings-on. So, why aren't we piling all-in on Ukraine to force their hands here? "Let the fucking UN in you dumb cunts, or we cut off your supply lines"??

Seems a reasonable and proportionate action to ensure our "ally" is acting in good faith, no?

You just staying blind to this m8? Picking and choosing what you want to answer, and only talking about the bad shit Russia is doing (which I'm not arguing about at all - we all know they're dicks).